bread and circus

Came across the orgin of the phrase, Bread and Circus, as I was reading Richard Horsely's 'Jesus and Empire.' It was meant to describe the oppulence enjoyed by the minority elites 'Bread' and the parties and parades that the emperor cult employed to keep them happy. Meanwhile the vast majority of the peasantry lived in extreme poverty. Why would anyone care as long as they got to eat good food and go to great parties. Shocking we say.

Take a look at this and tell me what you think.http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/2008/06/arrested-for-feeding-the-poor.html#comments

Bread and Circus, does this phrase apply to America as well?

What Jesus Taught: Economics

This past sundays sermon follows.
The content is all my own based on reading Warren Carter and Richard Horsely.
The format of the sermon was inspired by a sermon delivered by The Rev. Terry Hamilton that I found at the following website. I like the simple and direct approach that she took in dealing with a difficult and controversial issue that I decided to use the format myself.
http://lifewatch.org/abortion.html

Luke 7:36-50
One of the Pharisees asked Jesus* to eat with him, and he went into the Pharisee’s house and took his place at the table. 37And a woman in the city, who was a sinner, having learned that he was eating in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment. 38She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her tears and to dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet and anointing them with the ointment. 39Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw it, he said to himself, ‘If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him—that she is a sinner.’ 40Jesus spoke up and said to him, ‘Simon, I have something to say to you.’ ‘Teacher,’ he replied, ‘speak.’ 41‘A certain creditor had two debtors; one owed five hundred denarii,* and the other fifty. 42When they could not pay, he cancelled the debts for both of them. Now which of them will love him more?’ 43Simon answered, ‘I suppose the one for whom he cancelled the greater debt.’ And Jesus* said to him, ‘You have judged rightly.’ 44Then turning towards the woman, he said to Simon, ‘Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has bathed my feet with her tears and dried them with her hair. 45You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not stopped kissing my feet. 46You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. 47Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little.’ 48Then he said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven.’ 49But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, ‘Who is this who even forgives sins?’ 50And he said to the woman, ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace.’

Money is a taboo subject for churches. The reactions of the church to applying the gospel to economics and finance seems to fall into camps in my experience. One, a dogmatic approach which focuses on tithing, giving ten percent of one's income to the church. This falls short of what Jesus taught in two ways; giving in concentrated on meeting a requirement, which the Pharisees did, and Jesus criticized. One is not giving from the heart, but to meet a demand. Second, it focuses on institutional giving. Jesus wasn't talking about giving to an institution, but to the poor in general.
On the other hand, some churches tend to ignore the topic altogether. Discussing one's finances in public is not polite. There is the obligatory fall stewardship sermon, but otherwise the topic is generally not brought up. This ultimately fails too. Again, Jesus' teaching is focused on supporting an institution, not subversively created justice in an unjust system. And it allows us to divide our lives before God... Jesus can have my heart, by my wallet is mine.

I have three points I hope to make today about what Jesus taught about Kingdom Economics.
First: the Gospel Favors the poor; Jesus sought out the poor, particularly those enslaved to debt and his message was meant specifically for them as well as a criticism of the wealthy elites.
Second: The way we think of wealth in America today (in many churches) is not really connected to the Bible because we assume that wealth in the property of the individual without connection to a larger community.
Third: Jesus urged his disciples to think of wealth in terms of the community as opposed to the individual. Wealth was a tool for communal good instead of individual right or good.

1. The Gospel Favors the Poor
As we saw a few short weeks ago, Jesus began his ministry in Luke chapter four by proclaiming good news to the poor, the forgiveness of debts and the year of the Lord's favor. Strange we have missed the economics of Jesus message, for when we start to look and listen with open ears, we hear economics everywhere. Jesus began the sermon of the Mount or the Beatitudes with the proclamation of blessing to the poor. When Jesus taught the disciples to pray, he specifically mentioned debt; 'forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.'
Some of our favorite Jesus stories have economic themes; the Young Ruler who seeks eternal life in Luke... which leads Jesus to encourage him to 'sell all you own and give to the poor.' the Good Samaritan, in which an unlikely foreigner becomes the hero, pays money out of his own pocket to care for the injured Israelite he finds on the road-side. The story of Zacchaeus, who has grown wealthy by collecting taxes for the Romans and defrauding his neighbors. When he meets JEsus he offers to repay those he has defrauded four times what he took and then to liquidate half of his wealth to distribute to the poor. This, Jesus calls salvation. Jesus would describe the Kingdom of God in terms of a King who forgives debt in Matt 18.

Without a doubt in my mind, Jesus meant to be talking about wealth and finance. Debts was not a metaphor, but a real concern for Jesus and he purposely challenged the wealthy elites who grew rich on the labor and oppression of the peasantry. He purposely challenged his disciples to care for the poor and put their very salvation in economic terms.

2. We assume our wealth is our own.
This is a popular concept in our culture, perhaps a bedrock belief. We tend to admire those who build wealth, attian impressive houses, cars, clothes, and retire early to florida or arizona. They have worked hard for their money and deserve to reap the benefits.

Luke 12 tells a story of Jesus in which he tells a parable of a successful businessman. He is so successful that he cannot find enough room for all his harvest. So he goes on an expansive building project to protect his wealth and plan an early retirement. In our cultures terms, he is a success. He did what we see people do with their wealth all the time, expanded, invested, and used for his own benefit. 2000 years ago Jesus told a success story for today... except that JEsus does not let it stay a success story. He has God call this man a fool. He has only considered himself in this parable and the use of his wealth for his own benefit. His view of wealth, which I suggest is not so different from our own... God labels foolish.

Luke 16 contains the story of Lazarus and the rich man. The rich man eats wonderful food and dresses in the finest clothes. We are not told that he was cruel or injust. We are not told that he exploited anyone for his wealth (although it was rare in those days to grow rich without exploitation.) Lazarus sits outside of his gates and waits for the scraps from his table. Both men die. The rich man lands in torment and Lazarus at Abraham's side. The rich man's sin, as I see it anyway, was woeful ignorance of the suffering of the poor. He thought of his wealth as his own and the poverty and suffering of others as having no connection to him. This view of the world lands him in torment. I think these two stories show us that Jesus did not condone a personal and private view of wealth. Both characters in these stories are punished because they only thought of themselves and their wealth. Our money is not simply our own when we pledge ourselves through baptism to the Kingdom of God.

3. Wealth as Communal Salvation
So how did Jesus expect Jesus to think of wealth? Lets get back to our original story in Luke 7. Jesus is eating with a Pharisee, who would not be an elite, a part of the richest in society. But a pharisee would have been much wealthier than the peasantry, wealthy enough to throw a banquet for his friends. These banquets as I understand them were meant to both gain the Pharisee honor among his socio-economic peers, as he impressed them with the fruits of his wealth. This would also perhaps be a chance to gain the eye of someone in the elite class, who he could serve and gain more honor, prestige and wealth. The woman's presence is an offense because she cannot contribute to his honor or his wealth. this dinner is only for the wealthy and influential. His wealth is not meant to benefit her.
But notice that in Jesus story, the character with the highest honor and wealth, the King, is willing to sacrifice his own profit, his own wealth, in order to enable the poorer retainer to survive. Honor and status is gained through generous, even sacrificial sharing of wealth. this is the challenge to the pharisee, who sees his wealth as his own and his honor as tied to his disconnect from the poor. Jesus tells a story in which wealth is shared and honor ascribed to those who associate with and care for the poor.
The Zacchaeus story fits into this economic ethic as well. He gives half of his wealth and pays back four times what he has defrauded. He has put his own wealth and honor in jeopardy in order to benefit his neighbors and his community.
I think even Matthew 25 fits into this ethic. Salvation is given to those who have fed the hungry and clothed the naked. These actions presumably would stake a certain claim on ones own wealth. It would cost those who fed and clothed, and this ethic of sharing for the benefit of the community brings them into the kingdom and the very presence of Jesus.
God Bless You All

Allegiance to God's Kingdom II

Matt 6:24
No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. you cannot serve both God and Money.

Of course we don't 'love' money do we? I don't believe that many of us think of money in terms of 'love.' 'Money can't buy happiness' we say, and I believe sincerely. the story is told of a preacher who, after the collection was taken, tossed out some of the one dollar bills and the fives too, dismissively and said, the Kingdom of God needs tens and twenties not ones and fives. It make me bristle just to type this story. I can't imagine having the audacity to say it. I CAN imagine how I would feel if I heard it said to me, and I wouldn't like it. But it is an interesting case study. I say that I don't love money, until I have to rearrange some of my own spending habits for the sake of my church or one of its ministries. I do want the love and support of God's Kingdom as present in the church, but am I willing to cut back on dinners out, DD coffee, or that recliner that I've always wanted, in order to offer more support to the Kingdom of God and through it, those in greater need than I?
'Love of money' is a subtle thing, that we don't realize we have succumbed to until we are asked to give up some of our own goods that money provides. Please notice that in writing this reflection, I used the personal pronoun 'I' most often. This reflection is as much a challenge to me as it is to you. I am not claiming to be the perfect example of pledging my allegiance to the Kingdom with finance. But the claim that Jesus makes is clear. It is my hope that together we can encourage and support each other in this financial pledge of allegiance and not leave our faithfullness in the realm of spirit and mind only.
blessings

Allegiance to God's Kingdom continued

I put together reflections or devotions for further reflections.
Here is today's. they will continue throughout the week.

Matt 10:37-38
'Anyone who loved his father and mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.'

Matt 12: 48-50
'He replied to him, 'who is my mother, and who are my brothers" Pointing to his disciples, he said, 'Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven in my brother and sister and mother.'

It is painful and shocking to hear Jesus say that anyone is not worthy of him. It goes against our dearest held beliefs in a God of ove and in Jesus our friend and brother, who loved all and accepted even the most despised. We (that is clergy) have not been clear enough with our congregations about the delicate balance of a relationship with God through Christ. In saying, Come to me ALL you who are weary and heavy leaden...' Jesus is going against the assumption common to his day taht only the purest (often understood, the wealthiest, most powerful, with the highest social standing) were worthy of God's kingdom. In saying 'ALL' Jesus is redifining who is welcome in the kingdom. It is not and will not be a place for just the 'beautiful people' but is open to all. but then we stop there. The Kingdom is open to all... but that is not all that Jesus said. The 'gatekeeper' of the Kingdom (that is Jesus) isnot looking for wealth or status, true... but he is looking for something. We have hoped that everyone who is 'good' gets 'in'. But Jesus has a higher standard than that... taking up a cross and doing the will of my Father... Those who are welcome in the kingdom and those who hope to be a part of God's Kingdom are those who in their lifetime make the Kingdom and its values their highest priority. Their allegiance is to the Kingdom of God and to that alone.
It is not any easier for me to write this than it is for you to read I am sure. This 'taking up a cross' faith cannot be private, but must be public. It cannot simply be comforting, but must be challenging. It is not only meant for me, but must reach out in service and love to others. It will not always (often rarely) fit easily into the life I alread have and feel comfortable with. It will rearrange my priorities and it will challenge our allegiances.

God Bless

I Pledge Allegiane; Jesus and the Question of Taxation

Luke 20:20-29
This is pretty much how I remember this sunday's sermon. I didn't have a script or an outline, I find them prohibitive.

In the days and weeks after the United States entered WWII, California passed legislation that send Japanese-American's to internment camps. One woman found this policy to violate her allegiance to the Kingdom of God and its value of love for neighbor and the foreigner in our midst. She wrote to various government officials and even the President to no avail.
What do we do when there is a clash between our allegiances? When the nation that we pledge allegiance to creates and upholds policies and actions that violate our allegiance to the Kingdom of God?

When the 'spies' representatives of the Temple Priesthood and scribes, ask Jesus, 'Is it lawful for us to pay taxes to Caesar, they are asking him where his allegiance lies, with Rome or with Israel? There is no good way for Jesus to answer this question. If he replies 'No, it is not lawful' he is upholding Torah, for the coin violates the first two commandments. The people who follow him would expect this and be pleased. the Zealots and similar elements present in the political landscape, who urged armed insurrection against Rome, would have thought Jesus to be one of them. And Pilate would not have been pleased. But, if he answered 'Yes, pay the taxes,' He would have lost all credibility with the people and been exposed by the Priests and Scribes, as unfit to teach the law. Say, No and pledge your allegiance to a violent element within Israel. Say Yes and pledge your allegiance to Rome.

Jesus replies to the question with a question of his own. 'Whose image is on the coin?' I believe that Jesus is responding not only to the temple tax, but to Roman taxation in general. In this system a tax was paid simply for living. A person paid a tax to Rome just for existing, which was Rome's way of reminding Israel that they belonged to Rome, they lived or died at the whim of their Roman lords. Whose image is on the coin reminds us and I think reminded those listening, of Genesis, where we are said to be created in the image of God. Rome may claim ownership of us, Jesus is subtly suggesting, but we know whose we are. We are God's people and not Caesars. Jesus cannot opening speak of such things. Herzog has explained clearly that Jesus is using one of the weapons of the oppressed, which is a veiled or hidden subversion. its sounds innocent, but communicates to those who know how to listen a message that subverts the oppressor.

On the denarius, were we to look at one, we would see the image of Caesar with laurel leaf crown, a symbol of divinity. Along with the laurel crown, and I am paraphrasing an exact translation, were the words 'Son of the Divine Caesar.' It was a claim to be god, one of the gods... An image of a man claiming to be god. a violation of the first two commandments.

Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's. This phrase is a part of popular culture and you will still hear people make reference to it. But when they do it often in defeat. 'Time to render unto Caesar' is to do something that one does not want to do but must. And in the church that I was raised, Jesus was simply saying, ' pay taxes to Caesar, but give God your heart, as if Jesus were responding to a political and ethical questions, with personal piety.

What is not God's. Ps 24 says; 'the earth is the Lord's and all that dwells in it,' and I wonder if those listening did not pick up on that cue. Jesus is in effect trumping the claim of Caesar with the claim of God, but in such a way as to not raise the ire of Pilate and the Legions.

In short, Jesus does not answer the political question of this day with any of the prescribed and assumed political philosophies or schools available. he will not pledge allegiance to ROme, nor will he pledge allegiance to a nationalism that is willing to use violence. His politics is of the Kingdom and will not fit into any other categories.

Which is the challenge of Jesus, today. When Jesus teaches about power, economics, health care, poverty, it will not fit into Democrat or Republican speak or Liberal or Conservative language. Jesus speaks a different language from a different perspective, that of the Kingdom.
And Jesus taught that this would be our ultimate allegiance. 'Who is my mother and my brother? He who does the will of my Father.' Ultimate allegiance to the Kingdom of God. If we seek to learn the ethics and politics of Jesus, we will going into new territory that does not fit into the paradigms that we now hear on CNN or Fox News.

The other night I turned on Carriers, a documentary on PBS about life aboard an air-craft carrier. In the opening one of the military women serving explained the reason for her service. 'For God and Country' she said. 'Which surprises people who don't think I'm very religious.'
My friends, 'For God and Country,' is never a tennable ethical guide for a Christian. It too simply equates the will of the state, the will of a President or a People, with the will of God. If 'for God and Country is our allegiance,' it assumes that those two things, God and the US, are always in harmony. God then becomes a tool for condoning every action, every policy, that we undertake as a nation. God and Nation become one, and our ultimate authority then is... Nation.

But we have pledged our Allegiance to the Kingdom of God. We do that every Sunday when we pray 'Thy Kingdom Come, Thy Will be Done.' That is what Jesus expected of his disciples, 'Seek first the kingdom and its righteousness...' he said.

so what did the woman do when presented with a clash of allegiances? She created the Kingdom and held her allegiance as best she could. She bought her japanese neighbors properties for a dollar each. She kept them and held them until her neighbors could return , so that they would be able to return to their homes. Thy Kingdom Come, that was her pledge of allegiance, and she not only prayed it, but participated in creating its reality, for a moment, a frightening moment in time. May we all have that same courage

God Bless you all

(that is pretty much what I said. I will soon have the source of the story that opened and closed the sermon. Much of the exegetical information came from William Herzog and John Howard Yoder, as well as Hauerwas on Matthews version of this story, and some NT Wright thrown in for good measure.)